Richard Clark wrote:

I calibrated the sonar domes in the Navy, and then pressure tested them
for Honeywell at their Marine Systems Division here in Seattle.

Funny story about that. The pressure vessel was controlled by an
ancient program running in FORTRAN (if you can imagine that).

It just goes to show, life is nothing but the story-line for a Dilbert
strip.

Frame 1:
Honeywell asked me to consult (after I had been a Metrologist for them
some years earlier) on how to translate the FORTRAN to HP Basic.

That sort of drew a slack-jawed reaction from me, it was rather a
regressive move. I suggested that the HP computers had a very nice
Pascal that would do a lot better, and the fireworks went off.

Frame 2:
"Pascal? Isn't that one of those European commie languages? It is
written backwards isn't it?"

Management wanted to read the code.

Frame 3:
The handwriting was on the wall and it spelled DOOMED.




--
73 from Ian GM3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

EXACTLY!!!!

Warmest regards,
John

The different languages "speak" to coders:
1) Assembly says, "All I know about is binary bits--if you can't twist your
mind down strange directions you have not yet even imagined--don't bother
me!"
2) Basic says, let's keep it simple, but, I pay attention to data types.
3) Fortran says, "I worship mathematicians--and stand as a tribute to them."
4) Pascal says, "I am structure, form, logic and beauty--if you come back
months later, I stand as clear, sleek, fast and as beautiful as the code you
first created (well, at least TurboPascal says all that grin)."
5) "C/C++" says, "I am all of the above--and MUCH, MUCH more, and like a
spoiled child--you can have your way with me--take care in how you use me."

Regards,
John

Oh yeah!
And COBOL says, "I have NO time for games here--I am ALL about business!"

regards,
john

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
Funny story about that. The pressure vessel was controlled by an
ancient program running in FORTRAN (if you can imagine that).
Honeywell asked me to consult (after I had been a Metrologist for them
some years earlier) on how to translate the FORTRAN to HP Basic.

funny story about that... i just got tasked to dig up the fortran code for a
product my company is just thinking of upgrading to something more modern.
they just finally ran up against windows xp that refuses to run the old dos
extender the fortran was linked with... then it was wrapped with a windows
gui that just ran the old fortran executable in the background. the gui
will probably be more problems to update than the fortran if i can find the
source... it uses visual c++ 1.52 i think, the last of the 16 bit windows
compilers from ms.

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:13:13 -0000, "Dave" wrote:

it uses visual c++ 1.52

Hi Dave,

My condolences. M$ asked me to come in and teach them C++ back in
1990 - what a cluster****. They fired me, never asked me back, and I
could not have felt a greater sense of relief having escaped that
narcissistic hot-house of artificial blooms.

For those of you tied to the ball and chain of their latest components
with C#, it was back in these early days (1990) that they struggled to
make that symbol # out of pairs of pluses stacked:
++
++

They were going to capture OO coding with C++++. What vanity!

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

There's a great deal of Fortran programming being done today -- the
comp.lang.fortran newsgroup is very active. You're sure to be able to
get some help with the Fortran there. Fortran has been standardized for
a long time, and modern compilers handle legacy code, so it shouldn't be
difficult to recompile the Fortran code with a modern compiler (e.g.,
Compaq, Intel, Lahey) either as an EXE or DLL to be run from the GUI of
your choice. That's exactly what EZNEC does with the Fortran-compiled
NEC code.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Dave wrote:

funny story about that... i just got tasked to dig up the fortran code for a
product my company is just thinking of upgrading to something more modern.
they just finally ran up against windows xp that refuses to run the old dos
extender the fortran was linked with... then it was wrapped with a windows
gui that just ran the old fortran executable in the background. the gui
will probably be more problems to update than the fortran if i can find the
source... it uses visual c++ 1.52 i think, the last of the 16 bit windows
compilers from ms.

fortran is no problem, i have been doing that off and on since 1974 or so.
the problem with this project will be locating all the source. it was done
by various contractors who may not have submitted everything to our library
way back whenever this was first done. i know that at least part of it was
done with lahey tools so that shouldn't be a problem.

"Roy Lewallen" wrote in message
...
There's a great deal of Fortran programming being done today -- the
comp.lang.fortran newsgroup is very active. You're sure to be able to
get some help with the Fortran there. Fortran has been standardized for
a long time, and modern compilers handle legacy code, so it shouldn't be
difficult to recompile the Fortran code with a modern compiler (e.g.,
Compaq, Intel, Lahey) either as an EXE or DLL to be run from the GUI of
your choice. That's exactly what EZNEC does with the Fortran-compiled
NEC code.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Dave wrote:

funny story about that... i just got tasked to dig up the fortran code
for a
product my company is just thinking of upgrading to something more
modern.
they just finally ran up against windows xp that refuses to run the old
dos
extender the fortran was linked with... then it was wrapped with a
windows
gui that just ran the old fortran executable in the background. the gui
will probably be more problems to update than the fortran if i can find
the
source... it uses visual c++ 1.52 i think, the last of the 16 bit
windows
compilers from ms.

Yes, .dll libraries of functions/procedures is one answer to a few
problems...
Most everything I write is a .dll... others do the GUI... I construct a
simple command prompt front end to check and debug the code--then ship it
off to others to do the "brain dead" GUI work...
I don't like visual IDE's (Independent Development Environments)... in fact,
I don't like GUI's!!!
I am still ****ed off everyone went from command prompt to GUI!!! It was a
bad idea when apple innovated it--it was still a bad idea when bill stole it
and copied it!!!

However, mp3 players, dvd players, etc running on computer platforms DO have
advantages...

All my utilities/apps I write run from the command line (well, most.) If I
am forced to construct a GUI, then I go directly to the winapi (you don't
need a visual environment to construct windows and graphics!), calling the
windows functions directly from my code, no third party tools (no click and
create visual tools!)

Visual tools are not needed, windows contains all the code in .dll's
already--to construct windows, msgbox'es, etc... why do I want to let
another programmer translate for me--the winapi itself makes more sense!

But, Roy, Fortran is a dead language--even my beloved Pascal, which I hate
to admit, is a dead language... with the power, speed and freedom of "C++"
all other languages are obsolete (even assembly has fallen--just drop to
inline assembly and write in assembly code) unless they run on minimal
platforms (thin clients)...

I would like to say, "This is just my opinion." However, I will stand
beside this as being fact... frown

Regards,
John

John Smith wrote:
. . .
But, Roy, Fortran is a dead language--
. . .

You're very wrong about that. Fortran is in wide daily use, with a great
deal of active programming going on. The main users are academic,
scientific community, and the military. Compilers are modern and
continue to be updated. The language itself undergoes periodic revisions
and updates via a standards committee. It's an evolving, modern, active
language. Drop by comp.lang.fortran or do a little basic web research
and see for yourself.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL